capquest chasing 18 year old debt

oakleaf1725

Hi,

I have received a letter today from Capquest advising me that on 20/12/2006 they took legal ownership of a credit agreement with the AA and i am now to pay them the outstanding balance of £2464 made payable to Opos Ltd 

They have also advised me they would reduce the debt to £2488 - which is actually an increase - if i paid immediately.

I am understandably confused. I do remember having a loan with the AA but i dont believe a debt from 2006 can be chased 18 years later can it ? This is the first time in 18 years i have heard anything from them about this matter and i have never spoken to anyone there or made any contact with them.

Grumpelstiltskin

Send them this by snail mail.

Letter when you know nothing about about the debt - AKA "Prove it" letter — MoneySavingExpert Forum

Under no circumstances phone them whatever rubbish you might receive from them.

retiredbanker1

So you had a loan with the AA - did you make any repayments - have they defaulted you - have you had any agreements to pay token amounts towards the debt at all?
When was the last time you had any correspondence about this at all?

If over 6 years then it will be statute barred IMO.

oakleaf1725

retiredbanker1 said:

So you had a loan with the AA - did you make any repayments - have they defaulted you - have you had any agreements to pay token amounts towards the debt at all?
When was the last time you had any correspondence about this at all?

If over 6 years then it will be statute barred IMO.

I made repayments back in 2006. They would have defaulted me in 2006 when i was sectioned.

Apart from this letter, last correspondence was in 2006 when they were advised I was sectioned.

Nasqueron

You might be better with a statute barred letter not the prove it as it's simpler

Debt companies buy these up for pennies in the pound and send out fishing letters hoping some will pay up or aren't barred yet. If you have not acknowledged it since 2006 it is not enforceable so the statute barred one is simpler 

sourcrates

Just in case the OP does return to read these responses, I tend to agree with Nasqueron that because so much time has elapsed, going straight in with the statute barred letter may save time, because the provit-letter asks for evidence, and whatever the reply it would then require the statute barred letter to be sent anyway.